Tucker Carlson’s interview with far-right antisemite Nick Fuentes divides conservatives over support for Israel

[zippy2006]

And the President of Heritage Foundation who defended Tucker for giving him a soft ball interview has resigned.

Good!
The right needs to distance itself from folks like Fuentes and Tucker, in much the same way that the left needs to distance itself from its extremists. We currently have four parties shoehorned into a two-party system.

 

[zippy2006]

The belief that a people holding the position of
"We're entitled whatever land we want, we're God's chosen people, the purpose in life of the "others" (their word for it is "Goys") is to cater to us and be merely tools that help us facilitate our walk with the Creator of the Universe since we're the important ones -- just look it up, it's in our book"

...can, and does , lead to some pretty obnoxious behavior that doesn't jive with the concept of a free and flourishing society.

So you're an anti-Semite. You think the far left and the far right both hold to anti-Semitism for the same reason, namely because Jews are the worst. Why are they worst? Because of silly strawmen, of course.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

They are far apart. The Left's hate is emotional, irrational and ignorant, and I mean by the dictionary definition of "ignorant". They don't know what they're talking about, or if they do, they're dishonest about. I could go into details about that.

I'm no Nick expert but from what I've heard from him and other conservatives is they don't hate Israel, they just don't care about Israel.

Nick, in particular, seems to be a subscriber to "Racialism" (which he claims isn't the same as racism, but there are some similar practical effects)

He basically believes that different races are born with different innate immutable psychological traits that make certain behaviors more likely. So for instance, Fuentes would suggest that a Jewish person is born with a "built-in" desire for wanting to accumulate political and economic dominance, and they can't help it anymore than a person can help whether or not they're 5'3" or 6'1"

But the rationales I was referring to were that the political horseshoe that exists for Israel stems from "We don't want our money going to fund this other nation and having to play the role of carrying their water for them"

Where the reasons diverge is in the aspect of the "America First" types not wanting our money to be used by anyone but ourselves, as where the left's is more of a "colonizer vs. colonized" lens.

But the same core sentiment is there for both, which is "Our politicians seem to walk on eggshells around Israel and take orders from them, and we don't like it"

 

[ThatRobGuy]

So you're an anti-Semite. You think the far left and the far right both hold to anti-Semitism for the same reason, namely because Jews are the worst. Why are they worst? Because of silly strawmen, of course.

No, I have no problem with Jewish people as a race...I don't see them any differently than anyone else.

I DO take issue with behaviors and mentalities that are associated with Hasidic Judaism as a religion. But those aren't circumstances of birth, those are circumstances of choice.

For instance, this kind of stuff.

And there are several other videos of Hasidic settlers barging into towns in the West Bank, and chasing people with guns and hitting them with sticks (but I can't link those due to forum rules)

And in some more extreme examples, doing things like this:

I censored out the pic, but that's a 60-something year old woman bleeding out on the ground because a Hasidic settler decided it was time to "exercise his religious birth right" and take over her family olive farm.

 

[Chesterton]

You could check out the "right wing watch" site.

You could search for fuentes and antisemitism and get a lot of links (its his main thing, being a Hitler fan, as he is).

Thanks! That's a great idea. Maybe I'll check with the ADL and the SPLC, too.

One non-video link that search turns up is:

Who is Nick Fuentes and Why Is His Antisemitism Dangerous for America?

What you need to know about Nicholas “Nick” J. Fuentes, his America First movement, his relationship with Alex Jones, “the Groypers,” Milo Yiannopoulos, and more.

www.ajc.org

There are many more if you care to look.

I learned in elementary school that when you write an essay, it's topic should be related to the title you give the essay. This doesn't mention why his anti-Semitism is dangerous for America. Although, the title is in question form, so maybe the AJC was either unable to answer the question, or decided he's not dangerous.

Anyway, there were no hateful words actually from Nick as I hoped for. There was an unusual comment about non-Christians not belonging in Western Civilization, but to verify that I'd have to listen to a podcast that's over two hours long. Not that interested.

See the recent piece Shapiro put together, especially at 6:24 (warning: language).

I'd also not find it helpful to consult the person who despises Nick more than anyone else in the world. If that one masked gunman who tried to assassinate Nick were just a little bit shorter, I'd be suspicious.

 

[Chesterton]

Nick, in particular, seems to be a subscriber to "Racialism" (which he claims isn't the same as racism, but there are some similar practical effects)

That's just like a WWII-era term for racism. No different. It's what Churchill used to describe the beliefs of the Nazis, so Nick is not helping himself there.

He basically believes that different races are born with different innate immutable psychological traits that make certain behaviors more likely. So for instance, Fuentes would suggest that a Jewish person is born with a "built-in" desire for wanting to accumulate political and economic dominance, and they can't help it anymore than a person can help whether or not they're 5'3" or 6'1"

Sounds like the kind of science you could invent without ever cracking open a single book. But perhaps he's right, or partially right. I don't know.

But the rationales I was referring to were that the political horseshoe that exists for Israel stems from "We don't want our money going to fund this other nation and having to play the role of carrying their water for them"

They're different. That's not what the left cares about. And I've never heard any conservative chanting "From the river to the sea."

Where the reasons diverge is in the aspect of the "America First" types not wanting our money to be used by anyone but ourselves, as where the left's is more of a "colonizer vs. colonized" lens.

But the same core sentiment is there for both, which is "Our politicians seem to walk on eggshells around Israel and take orders from them, and we don't like it"

That's not what the left cares about.

 

[zippy2006]

I'd also not find it helpful to consult the person who despises Nick more than anyone else in the world.

You might want to go ahead and ask yourself why it is that Jews despise Fuentes. Maybe there's a reason? The clips are from Fuentes. They aren't doctored or fake.

 

[Chesterton]

You might want to go ahead and ask yourself why it is that Jews despise Fuentes. Maybe there's a reason? The clips are from Fuentes. They aren't doctored or fake.

Of course there's a reason. He says bad things about Jews.

 

[zippy2006]

Of course there's a reason. He says bad things about Jews.

But doesn't this answer your initial question?

To be clear, and in response to your post from the other thread, the portion of the video I linked is a number of clips of Fuentes promoting certain views or engaging in certain forms of rhetoric. Shapiro only appears for the first few seconds.

 

[zippy2006]

He basically believes that different races are born with different innate immutable psychological traits that make certain behaviors more likely. So for instance, Fuentes would suggest that a Jewish person is born with a "built-in" desire for wanting to accumulate political and economic dominance, and they can't help it anymore than a person can help whether or not they're 5'3" or 6'1"

This is what is generally considered racism, particularly when combined with the sort of disgust for the race which Fuentes engages in.

You've basically said, "He's not a racist. He just thinks Jews are inferior and need to be devalued appropriately." If that's not racism, then I'm not sure what is. If that's not racism, then Hitler apparently wasn't racist.

This whole Fuentes issue is boggling my mind.

 

[zippy2006]

No, I have no problem with Jewish people as a race...I don't see them any differently than anyone else.

I DO take issue with behaviors and mentalities that are associated with Hasidic Judaism as a religion. But those aren't circumstances of birth, those are circumstances of choice.

So you now want to distinguish the Jewish race from the Jewish religion, and you want to distinguish Hasidic Jews from other Jews, and yet your claims leading up to this point made no such distinctions. You made some blanket comments about the Jewish people from your bailey, and now you've retreated to your motte by claiming that you were only talking about the religion of Hasidic Judaism (cf. motte and bailey fallacy).

For example:

The belief that a people holding the position of...

A subset of some religion is not "a people." The Jews are "a people."

This sort of equivocation and backpedaling is taken straight out of the playbook of folks like Tucker and Fuentes. They say the thing and then pretend not to have said the thing. The irony is that Fuentes has himself pointed out the way that Tucker does this.

 

[Chesterton]

But doesn't this answer your initial question?

I asked for links where he hates Jews, not "says bad things about them". I say bad things about our politicians or other groups. I don't hate them. Jesus said bad things about groups, Jews in particular, and we know He is love.

To be clear, and in response to your post from the other thread, the portion of the video I linked is a number of clips of Fuentes promoting certain views or engaging in certain forms of rhetoric. Shapiro only appears for the first few seconds.

I watched the Nick parts of the clip. Nick's a showman, I think he loves being internet-famous, that's why I even doubt his sincerity to an extent.

In his earliest appearance on YouTube, he had a very different, toned-down personality. He was trying be like a normal mainstream news pundit. I recall when he was analyzing the 2016 candidates, he said Trump was "okay" but needed to dial down the rudeness and abrasiveness. Then Trump won the primary, and Nick's personality immediately changed. Like a light bulb went off over his head. He considered that the American people liked hearing blunt things from Trump, so he was going to out-Trump Trump.

He does things for effect. He's smiling broadly when he says he likes Hitler. He said those in power who practice demonry and witchcraft to inflict evil on our land should be killed, and some of them would be Jews. He didn't say Jews should be killed as Shapiro said he said.

But Shapiro is correct that the Left created him.

 

[zippy2006]

I asked for links where he hates Jews, not "says bad things about them". I say bad things about our politicians or other groups. I don't hate them. Jesus said bad things about groups, Jews in particular, and we know He is love.

Did you watch the clips?

How do you think someone demonstrates that they hate Jews? If we had a thesis, "Fuentes hates Jews," what sort of evidence would we need to produce in order to confirm that thesis?

 

[Chesterton]

Did you watch the clips?

How do you think someone demonstrates that they hate Jews? If we had a thesis, "Fuentes hates Jews," what sort of evidence would we need to produce in order to confirm that thesis?

Yes I watched. Sorry, I answered the first part of your post and forgot the second. I edited and the fuller answer is above.

 

[Hans Blaster]

I asked for links where he hates Jews, not "says bad things about them". I say bad things about our politicians or other groups. I don't hate them. Jesus said bad things about groups, Jews in particular, and we know He is love.

I watched the Nick parts of the clip. Nick's a showman, I think he loves being internet-famous, that's why I even doubt his sincerity to an extent.

Fuentes is genuine garbage. His hate is real.

In his earliest appearance on YouTube, he had a very different, toned-down personality. He was trying be like a normal mainstream news pundit. I recall when he was analyzing the 2016 candidates, he said Trump was "okay" but needed to dial down the rudeness and abrasiveness. Then Trump won the primary, and Nick's personality immediately changed. Like a light bulb went off over his head. He considered that the American people liked hearing blunt things from Trump, so he was going to out-Trump Trump.

Several years ago he played the "just asking questions" and "are you sure I am serious" game, but we can see through that.

He does things for effect. He's smiling broadly when he says he likes Hitler. He said those in power who practice demonry and witchcraft to inflict evil on our land should be killed, and some of them would be Jews. He didn't say Jews should be killed as Shapiro said he said.

Do you really fall for his "act"?

But Shapiro is correct that the Left created him.

This last sentence had promise, then it became nonsense. (Not surprising as Shapiro has a long history of being wrong.)

 

[Chesterton]

Fuentes is genuine garbage. His hate is real.

Hmm, that's a deeply thoughtful analysis. I may have to ponder that overnight.

Several years ago he played the "just asking questions" and "are you sure I am serious" game, but we can see through that.

I don't know what that means.

Do you really fall for his "act"?

In my first paragraph I said I doubt his sincerity.

 

[LizaMarie]

That's good. The GOPers aren't going to take my word on Tucker/Fuentes.

A Cuban Canadian, a Jewish American, and an Indian American. It's nice that they react, but it does illustrate the moral courage of conservative "leaders" seem largely limited to the outrages that directly affect them. (Or in this case, they know Fuentes says vile things that directly apply to them.)

Good. I was not aware of that.

Plenty of others have shunned Carlson and Fuentes too who are of white ethnicity ( I personally don’t believe in race except one human race) as per scripture

That's good. The GOPers aren't going to take my word on Tucker/Fuentes.

A Cuban Canadian, a Jewish American, and an Indian American. It's nice that they react, but it does illustrate the moral courage of conservative "leaders" seem largely limited to the outrages that directly affect them. (Or in this case, they know Fuentes says vile things that directly apply to them.)

Good. I was not aware of that.

Actually conservatives of all ethnicities have been calling out Tucker and denouncing Fuentes. It is true some may be worried about votes next year, but most are from conviction. Rod Dreher, an Orthodox Christian whose substack I subscribe to has been quite vocal about it. He has said that antisemitism is the civilizational canary in the coal mine. Also ,unfortunately, Democrats have their own antisemitsm problem as well, (from the river to the sea-etc)
and some of these principled conservatives do not want this creeping into the Republican party. Fuentes is IMO Taliban dressed in "Christian" costume.

 

[Chesterton]

Plenty of others have shunned Carlson and Fuentes too who are of white ethnicity...

They must be racist then, since Nick's half-Mexican and half-Italian.

Actually conservatives of all ethnicities have been calling out Tucker and denouncing Fuentes. It is true some may be worried about votes next year, but most are from conviction. Rod Dreher, an Orthodox Christian whose substack I subscribe to has been quite vocal about it. He has said that antisemitism is the civilizational canary in the coal mine. Also ,unfortunately, Democrats have their own antisemitsm problem as well, (from the river to the sea-etc)
and some of these principled conservatives do not want this creeping into the Republican party. Fuentes is IMO Taliban dressed in "Christian" costume.

I like Dreher, but he's wrong. The canary in the coal mine is freedom of speech.

 

[zippy2006]

I watched the Nick parts of the clip. Nick's a showman, I think he loves being internet-famous, that's why I even doubt his sincerity to an extent.

...


He does things for effect. He's smiling broadly when he says he likes Hitler.

I think you're sort of right, but it still presents a genuine problem. First, I think that someone who is willing to praise Hitler or Stalin, deny or downplay the Holocaust, and promote various forms of racism is seriously problematic, even if they are doing such things for effect. I am not even sure whether such a thing is better or worse than a more genuine approach.

But secondly, I don't think Fuentes is merely acting for effect. I think he really does believe the things he says, even if he speaks hyperbolically. When one speaks in hyperbolic parody constantly they eventually become confused about whether what they are saying is or is not hyperbolic parody, as do their followers. They are provided with a license to dismiss any possible criticism with the insinuation that they were merely trolling or baiting, and this in turn prevents them from undertaking any genuine self-criticism.

For example, to perform an extended "joke" where Jews being burned to death are equated to cookies baking in the oven, all in order to argue that only hundreds of thousands of Jews were murdered rather than 6 million, is seriously demented. It does have an effect, but doing such things for effect does not "get one off the hook," so to speak. That one would perform such a "joke" for effect just goes to show that the person really is anti-Semitic. They are intentionally equating a good thing (a delicious baked cookie) to a heinous crime (a genocidal act of murder).

 

[Chesterton]

I think you're sort of right, but it still presents a genuine problem. First, I think that someone who is willing to praise Hitler or Stalin, deny or downplay the Holocaust, and promote various forms of racism is seriously problematic, even if they are doing such things for effect. I am not even sure whether such a thing is better or worse than a more genuine approach.

But do you feel the same way when persons of the Left do similar things and they leave no doubt that they are genuine?

But secondly, I don't think Fuentes is merely acting for effect. I think he really does believe the things he says, even if he speaks hyperbolically. When one speaks in hyperbolic parody constantly they eventually become confused about whether what they are saying is or is not hyperbolic parody, as do their followers. They are provided with a license to dismiss any possible criticism with the insinuation that they were merely trolling or baiting, and this in turn prevents them from undertaking any genuine self-criticism.

I agree, except that I've never heard him dismiss any criticism on that basis, and I have heard him engage in self-criticism. And he is milder in his comeback now than he was before being de-platformed.

For example, to perform an extended "joke" where Jews being burned to death are equated to cookies baking in the oven, all in order to argue that only hundreds of thousands of Jews were murdered rather than 6 million, is seriously demented. It does have an effect, but doing such things for effect does not "get one off the hook," so to speak. That one would perform such a "joke" for effect just goes to show that the person really is anti-Semitic. They are intentionally equating a good thing (a delicious baked cookie) to a heinous crime (a genocidal act of murder).

I saw that at the time. It wasn't his joke. It was sent in by a viewer and he read it. I don't think it's demented; it's a view held by some scholars of the past who also got cancelled for expressing it.